The following post is based off of what I, personally, look at (as a moderator or DM) when it comes to player vs. player instances. It has been meshed with the views of the other DMs and moderators, and adjusted accordingly. The resulting product, which I am calling C.R.O.E., boils down the basics so that folks can get an understanding of what sort of stuff is going to be frowned upon (or punished), and what is considered acceptable within the terms of roleplay. It's not going to make everyone happy ... but that's the way it goes. There's a delicate balance needed to avoid a total free-for-all while still having "conflict" between characters. Also bear in mind these points are not meant to be bullet-proof nor are they foolproof ... so as with so many things, it comes under the review of ingame authorities if something is or is not out of bounds. As I have said many times ... it is often wiser to ask before just doing it.

1. Before just killing someone, examine them. If someone is coming up as being effortless or easy to you, let them walk. If you need to RP it from an evil view -- "Bah, weakling, you ain't worth my time ... get outta my face." If they attack you first, taunt you, try to cast a spell on you, or otherwise do something in a hostile physical sense to you, well then you can defend yourself. We don't buy into the "I'm a lowbie so you can't kill me" defense. Outside of that, however, we do not condone killing and griefing of low level characters who were just walking around generally minding their own business. This prohibition is universal and in effect in all areas other than The Pit and the El North arena.

2. Cities/settlements in 3.x are populated with many virtual citizens who, due to the nature of resources and such, are not ever seen. Realistically, however, you know they have to be there. Generally these citizens would rise up and rally against invaders and while each one may be little skilled, even the best adventurers would fall before a force of 1000 pitchfork wielding farmers. This being the case, cities and towns in 3.x are not player controlled. Each has established seen and unseen government factors in place ... and while a force might, for a time, claim some sort of victory over a city, control reverts back when the fighting is over unless you could find a way to kill those thousands of unseen and unfightable peasants. Bottom line here ... nobody other than the administration/DM folks controls the destiny of a city as they represent the "unwashed" thousands of men, women, children, and soldiers who live there. It should also be noted this applies to monsters/encounters. Just because a player saw some monster or "was there first" doesn't entitle the player to anything but just occupying space there.

3. With the above accepted, the reality of things is that the sphere of influence of the unseen masses and the local authorities have a finite area of effect. That area of effect is one click (i.e. one map) removed from the city/settlement itself ... and one-hopping from a rift gate is not counted. Using Eleriina as an example, Eleriina itself is the central point of reference ... El North and El West as well as the El Sewers and El Valley are all one click away. If you use Sylvandale ... it's the Sewers, Sylvan Temple, Sylvan Jail and the Southern Forest south of Sylvandale. Kravenwood would be the Estates proper and the areas within and the Rift Gate, and then the Lowlands area. Another would be the Lost Woods Village, which would carry influence into Butterfly Fields. When you get outside that one click zone of influence, then you are into areas where the local authorities and townspeople don't have the same degree of overview. These are the areas where more PvP stuff will be tolerated.

4. So what sort of PvP? Depends, really. You can still FIGHT in Sylvandale City, but no one can say "we took it over." Anyone trying to extort, threaten or engage in any sort of behavior that is trying to control the area or prevent people from moving around these "protected" areas is not welcome. If they want to do that, they need to get outside the spheres of influence of the settlements nearby ... where the lands are more wild and untamed. Using Kravenwood as an example, that would mean Topaz Quarry and/or the Kravenwood Path.

5. Falling into line with point #4, taxing would be considered one of the PvP types of situations where it must take place outside of a settled area's zone of influence. Simply put ... taxing/highwayman activity within one click of a town/city is not allowed ... but outside it, it is OK within limits. Again using Kravenwood as an example ... not OK within the Estates or the Lowlands ... would be OK in Topaz or on the Kravenwood Path. What are the limits? 300gp per character is the max that can be demanded, or some item of approximate value ... unless the person being taxed wants to fork over an item worth more if they don't have anything else suitable on them (I am thinking gems in this case but other things might be usable). The Taxer cannot afford to be too picky about what they get from the taxed ... if all they have to give you is a dagger +2, then take it in the name of good RP, as if you were to buy one it's more that 300gp. If the taxed claims to have no money/items then the taxer needs to allow them to walk back from where they came from ... but the taxed needs to do that immediately. If the taxed tries to delay overmuch, tries to run past the taxers, engages in hostilities or the like ... then the taxer may certainly attack the taxed. Taxers may not bring hostilities outside of the zone they are taxing ... if a taxed person manages to successfully run past them and make it to "safety" near a city/town then they are safe, deal with it.

6. Wars between organizations, guilds, or gangs are also limited to taking place in the same sorts of areas where taxing would be allowed. In general the same sorts of limitations apply ... but not completely. War can happen, at least in part, in a place like the Lowlands ... but once inside the city gates, a full scale raging battle is going to be frowned upon. Continuous mass hostility in a "protected" zone like the Lowlands will also be frowned upon should it continue unabated and without reason for too long. Once again the specifics will sometimes vary to the situation at hand ... it is best left to a moderator/DM to provide input insofar as when something is dragging on too long in a particular area.

7. Chat up your hostilities. Other than specifically targeted assassination attempts, which should be discussed with a moderator/DM in advance to avoid hard feelings and mistaken motive issues, the silent swoop in and just attack all that moves bit is generally pretty poor roleplay. Yes it takes time for someone to type in Talk "Attack them my forces, leave none standing! For the Glory of " but it at least puts a proper RPed framework into play.

8. When you've died, you've died. Resist the urge to switch characters and come back for revenge or persistently grief someone who got the drop on you once before. Consider the death something of a memory eraser and once you'd died you don't remember every little detail about what happened just before you died. What this boils down to is dealing with those who persistently go after certain other players simply because they don't like each other for one reason or another. In the context of a war, if you're dead and don't get rezzed and have to respawn ... go sit out the rest in the Inn somewhere and have a drink, don't try to rush back to the battle.

9. Conversely with #8, if you've killed someone, you got them ... it's over. Unless there is some very good reason (which had better be pretty damn plain as day as well as explainable) to go after the recently rezzed/respawned, don't do it. As was already said, you got them ... it's over, leave it at that. If they are being decent and following these rules themselves, they will not be back looking for more this day anyhow. Hostility may bubble up a day or so later with some other incident, and you can maybe get them then ... but allow these incidents to be more self-contained rather than one always leading to another every hour or so.

10. Pick Pocketing is part of the game as is disarming. It happens, deal with it. We don't wanna hear you crying about it, don't wanna hear the bitching about it. If you didn't actually SPOT it, then you really can't go postal when you see "Lost item" messages. Yes we know the PPing skill is not very true to life and sometimes results in PPing something of insane size/value ... but a rogue is a rogue and it's part of their character. If Player A actually takes the steps to RP the theft a bit, then Rogue B is more inclined to return something or maybe let them buy it back for some small fee. Maybe act suspicious, maybe ask someone nearby if they may have seen something odd or if you dropped something they might have picked up ... but the wholesale approach of "someone stole from MEEEE now all in the area DIEEEE until I get it back" is not going to be tolerated. Everything that exists within NWN can be abused in some way if someone wants to. Those who use these feats/skills in a purely abusive manner without any RP of their own will find they are no more tolerated than the goons who just blindly kill any possible rogue in sight.

11. There are other cases where things can happen between players but it's not your normal/typical PvP scenario. For example ... sometimes you will run into someone who might be trying to sell you a boat or shares of stock in a company, personal servants, or any number of things. It might not even be selling, it could be barter or some other agreement or contract. The old saying of "caveat emptor" (let the buyer beware) applies strongly. Someone may be legitimately selling something or offering a service ... they may also be trying to scam you. If you get scammed, we don't want to hear about it ... people get duped into scams all the time in real life, it's no different in roleplay. What is NOT allowed is for someone to in any way make it seem (or give the impression) that they are selling their product (or offering their services) in some official administrative capacity.

12. Another non-PvP instance which tends to crop its ugly head up into PvP (and other) situations, is the mixing of IC (In Character) and OOC (Out of Character) information. Your character doesn't know everything you know, nor do all of your characters know everything each of your other characters know. Even if they were all related somehow, brothers and sisters do not know everything their siblings do. Cases where this often come up are -- a) when someone gets killed in some situation and immediately resorts to "wait til I come back with my mage, you will be dead" or things of that nature b) all your characters have the same negative reaction to another character without even knowing them. These sorts of things are difficult to police and enforce against but they are still unacceptable and in bad form. Bad feelings from IC/OOC blending often leads to "TELL harassment" from one player to another ... something else which is difficult to police but is still not acceptable and in bad form. This IS something that can be easily captured in a screen shot, and that is your best route for enforcement.

13. If someone does something you feel is not proper or acceptable within the terms of the EULA and/or the points detailed in this guideline, do not just run to the forums to cry about it. If you can't get a moderator/DM to check into it in game, then send a private message on the forums to Conrad Hollows and Falkhor (best to send same note to both, just cut and paste) and they will look into it. Do have as much evidence as you can muster ... screen captures are certainly often helpful, other witnesses as well. Be honest as well because if it comes to light that you hid something, you will regret it later. Suffice to say it will probably be better to admit to whatever you did and take a lesser penalty than try to hide it and get the book thrown at you.

The moderators keep a rather extensive list of players and characters who are known to be sources of trouble. Investigations will be done in a case by case manner to look at whatever evidence is at hand and compare it to whatever other outstanding complaints or observations there may be about a given player. Penalties can include, but are not limited to, loss of levels, loss of character, temporary banning, or long term banning. In dealing with those who have proven to be historically problematic, we are going to take a dim view of weasling around with some excuses. We will do our best to match the punishment with the crime, but there is no right to play here ... we are all guests ... and if one guest is making the rest of them uncomfortable in a repeated manner, we reserve the ability to remove that guest from the party. All issues pertaining to player punishments are handled by Conrad Hollows and Falkhor in conjunction with the input of the other DMs and moderators. Please don't bother BriHurley about it, don't bother GorbGuy about it... neither wants or needs to hear it, they have important developer and server issues to deal with.

Rogue's addendum, added 6/1/03 (courtesy Griff Inn)
To the Thieves:

First of all pickpocketing is considered a hostile action, and therefore cannot be used on players that are rated effortless to you. I know this makes no sense in terms of roleplay, but the rule is thinking more about being fair to the lowbie players. You wouldn't like it if you had just joined Dyso and got your inventory wiped by some level 20 uber-thief. Neither would they.

Secondly, you may steal up to 10 dispensable items or 1 valuable non-dispensable item. Dispensable items are things that are one-use or a limited use, like scrolls, potions, wands etc. A non-dispensable item is anything you can put in your inventory slots, like armor, rings, cloaks, weapons etc, or anything that can be recharged by resting (i.e. something that has uses/day). Valuable is defined as anything with +3 or better enhancement, or any item that has a unique description. For example an Ice Talon is a +2 dagger, but since it has a unique description it counts as a valuable non-dispensable item. Items without any benefitting properties such as gold/silver/bronze rings/amulets and rings of jade/crimson etc are considered dispensable and not valuable. Soulstones are generally not considered valuable, except in the case of a Gloth stone. Plot items like seeds of life are also considered valuable. Note that weightless junk items like basic bullets, arrows, bolts, are not used when determining how many dispensable items you've stolen from that player.

If you steal an item heavier than 10 lbs, then the victim can get suspicious of theft, but not directly accuse you unless it's blatantly obvious that you are the thief. If you are spotted, it is up to your eagle-eyed victim on how they would go about dealing with you. Most characters would attempt to kill you, but some would be willing to forget the whole thing if you gave them their item back. It really depends on how the character feels about theft, and their alignment is usually the determinant. For example a lawful good paladin would not kill a thief instantly for catching them red-handed. He/she would usually want a reason as to why they did it, and if the reason is good enough ("I had to steal from you to feed my 12 starving children and wife"), then the pally may actually take pity on you rather than act harshly.

Stealing items in arena areas (eleriina north and the pit) results in your death. Though you can steal gold and get away with it, if the player wants it back, give it back. The arena areas are usually treated as OOC and even if the player does not spot the theft IC, they can still demand their money back.

Of course it goes without saying that chain pickpocketing is not allowed under any circumstances. You will be in serious trouble if you are caught attempting it. There is a script to stop this but still don't bother trying it as you'll probably receive a ban. I know pretty much everyone knows not to do this by now, but this is just for people new who don't know the rules.

To the Victims:

If you see "Lost Item: XXX" appear on your screen, this does not mean you have spotted the theft! You only spot the theft if the message "Fumble Butterfingers is attempting to steal from you!" appears, and if the thief is invisible or in stealth, they will become instantly visible and you will see them perform a theft animation.

If lost item appears and they are invisible or in stealth, and the item is light (anything 10 lbs or less is considered light, see below) then there's nothing much you can do about it IC. Just take it that someone's stole from you, and hope that you spot them or they steal something heavy.

If you spot them, you may do whatever you see fit to the thief - kill them
(once), demand your item back etc. But before you go killing the thief, stop and think about your alignment. Good aligned players generally don't say "die thief!!!" straight away, they usually want a reason why the thief tried to steal from them. Neutral and evil players are usually a lot less merciful.

If the item is heavy, then you can start to get very suspicious. Even if you can't see anyone, you would notice a large weight being removed from your backpack. There are two ways to deal with this:

The IC way: A message like *notices a considerable loss of weight in his/her backpack and looks around suspiciously* is generally enough to make the thief get nervous and run away. They'd be pretty foolish to carrying on stealing
from you to honest. Note however, that this does not mean you can kill the nearest suspect! Though your character does suspect theft, remember he/she cannot prove who it was. Accusations are fine, but no hostile action is allowed unless the thief admits the theft or it was very obvious who the thief was. (For example the thief runs straight at you without invisibility or stealth and when they are next to you, you feel the weight loss, and there is no one else in your sight that could have stolen from you).

The OOC way: Realistically there is no way a thief could lift a suit of full plate from your backpack without you noticing. This is bioware's fault for allowing such heavy items to be pickpocketable. You could ask the thief ooc for your item back, and if they agree they can return it to you with no hard feelings, and they are allowed to ask for a small amount of gold to compensate them (no more than 1000gp).

Some people seem to think that if they have true seeing, then they are immune to theft and/or can automatically spot a rogue stealing from them if they attempted it, and therefore have a right to attack that player. While true seeing does put off a lot of rogues from trying to steal from you, remember that they can still successfully pull it off if both players remain in character (and if you don't remain IC then you can get in trouble). For example, if the rogue stays behind you the whole time, then there's no way your character could possibly notice the theft, even though you could see them if you turned around. And even if you have a clear view of the character (true seeing or not), then they can still steal from you without you noticing. After all experienced rogues have trained for years, even decades to steal without people noticing, it comes as natural to them as a sorcerer casting a spell, or a fighter wielding his favored weapon. And as such thieves have many ways of distracting you, and they only need a single second of you being distracted to perform the theft. For example being in the middle of a fight with a creature is obviously considered a distracting moment when the thief has got a good chance of stealing without you noticing, true seeing or not.

If you spot the theft, then by all means cast true seeing to find the thief if they try to get out of sight, but if you fail your spot check, (i.e. "Lost Item: XXX" appears) do not cast true seeing. Your character did not spot the theft IC so there isn't any reason to cast true seeing at that time other than "I saw *Lost Item* appear and decided to be lame". If the item is heavy and you fail your spot check (i.e. you become suspicious of something), you may cast true seeing, but you may not kill the thief or harm them in any way as you have no way to prove it was them.

True seeing does have its uses however. One thing you can do with true seeing, is if you see someone approaching who you suspect of being a thief, you could caution them not to come any closer. This is perfectly fine IC, and you have a right to attack them if they come too close, as long as you aren't blocking a pathway or the suspected thief needs to get past you.

So in conclusion true seeing does not make you immune to pickpocket, nor does it improve your chances of spotting/detecting a theft. It just puts most thieves off trying to steal from you, and you can use it to your advantage when a suspected thief approaches you. If you are in a distracting situation however, such as combat or conversation with someone else for example, then the thief can pull the theft off without you noticing IC.

If someone is caught breaking any of these rules, don't get into an OOC squabblewith the player over it (well perhaps you could talk it through with them to explain where they went wrong, unfortunately a lot of the players have an "I'm always right" attitude), send a moderator a tell and they will sort it out._________________Envision something suitably witty here.

Last edited by Conrad Hollows on Sun Jun 01, 2003 11:35 pm, edited 1 time in total

would attempt to take slyvandale, single handedly, and would lose, are we allowed to do this for just RP value or not ?

2. The script is suppose to Drop a Item that some one stole from you Recently and tell you in the server window box, that IS considered IC, my understand, is this understand correct (AKA, if i knock him out, and find the item on him, thats Evidence)

3. is there going to be more OSB, or some otehr law enforcment, guild ?

the City of Undead, Naratyr, currently under development by Zedium is player run, and will include various things to keep itself stable. As well as many RP rules and additions To add to the fun of dysotopia, such as Courthouses, lawyers and hopefully Gallows(Public Hanging) and Torture. And laws such as no Freedom of Speech and organizations such as the Secret Police called the Reach of Glorin and the People, RGP for short. The rules and such for Naratyr have already been approved by Bri prior to Conrad and Falkhor's assuming of Player politics heads.

As for Kravenwood and Eleriina their appointed leaders have been unable to be on to defend or run their citys which is why i think Conrad is passing that specific thing, such as in the war for Kravenwood there was much controversy over whether the city was really taken over or not, as Bri (Kraven) was not there himself to defend the city, some speculated that since bri was not there it was not a valid victory and as such, Spam and complaints on forums, and most likely much Yelling to the Mods. Conrad, i think, wishes to avoid such things in the future by simply saying that one cannot overthrow a City.

Conrad one question though, May a city overthrow another city? This was one of the major things Gesh was so excited about, and i believe still is. The Wars between guilds and such....I ask this because for an Evil Administration to succeed in Foreign Relations it must resort to Imperialism. Though that could be avoided i was just wondering....._________________[quote:a89551bc29="AliZee'"]that shits utterly devoid of any meaningless sense...i tottally disagree on tha basis that tha argument you have pressented is full of actual facts and shit, i think based on tha fact that i have no idea of what tha fuck you were talkin gabout i would have to wholoeheartedly proclaim that you are wrong.
Thank you,
AliZee'[/quote]

1) "... cities and towns in 3.x are not player controlled. Each has established seen and unseen government factors in place ... and while a force might, for a time, claim some sort of victory over a city, control reverts back when the fighting is over unless you could find a way to kill those thousands of unseen and unfightable peasants. Bottom line here ... nobody other than the administration/DM folks controls the destiny of a city ..."

since there is no way to kill the unseen masses without some sort of involvement from a DM under the terms of a DMed event, there is no way for a player character to assert control over a city or town. A PC might claim any number of things in their personal madness ... but that does not make them so. A PC using their powers to kill/suppress anyone trying to move through a city/town would be in violation of CROE as well ...

"Anyone trying to extort, threaten or engage in any sort of behavior that is trying to control the area or prevent people from moving around these "protected" areas is not welcome."

2) The dropping of recently stolen goods is part of the game mechanisms. It may be "evidence" but if you got your evidence via unautorized means (i.e. by just killing any possible rogue around to see who drops what), then your evidence isn't worth a damn because you got it in an inadmissable manner.

"If you didn't actually SPOT it, then you really can't go postal when you see "Lost item" messages." as well as ... "If Player A actually takes the steps to RP the theft a bit, then Rogue B is more inclined to return something or maybe let them buy it back for some small fee. Maybe act suspicious, maybe ask someone nearby if they may have seen something odd or if you dropped something they might have picked up ... but the wholesale approach of "someone stole from MEEEE now all in the area DIEEEE until I get it back" is not going to be tolerated."

That said, it is also noteworthy to restate that people who PP rampantly just to be pains in the asses will find they are not tolerated much, either. That could range from being penalized themselves to the more likely case of benign neglect ... Rogue A has a track record of PPing and logging off and other sorts of nastiness. Fighter X finally gets ahold of him and kills him ... Rogue A is gonna get a lot of dear ears should he/she try to complain about it.

3) The OSB has always been something of a law enforcement oganization, but it's an RP group of characters dealing with IC matters in game, not some pseudo-moderator group. Granted there are moderators who are members of the OSB, but let's not confuse the two. Most of the issues dealt with in CROE tend to be mostly OOC in nature, not IC (and we don't buy into the lame RP excuses people come up with to cover their asses) so what that means is we WILL be looking to add more moderators who can be out in the field checking on things._________________Envision something suitably witty here.

Approved by Bri and implemented by Bri are two different things. When Naratyr actually is in the module, we can deal with it. At this point it's not, so it's a non-issue and what was outlined in the rules of engagement holds true. Since I know that isn't going to be enough of an answer for you .. I'll address the rest.

"The rules and such for Naratyr have already been approved by Bri prior to Conrad and Falkhor's assuming of Player politics heads." Assume would mean we just took those positions, which is not the case. Appointed to, by Bri, would be the correct nomenclature. Approval also does not mean assured usage or gauranteed implementation, things change ... people come and go, etc. Beyond which is the issue of just who owns and controls Dyso 3.x. It's not me, it's not you, it's Bri. If the point of Naratyr is it's the place where Glorin and pals get to do whatever they want to whomever they want in the name of "RP in the interests of the city of Naratyr" then I'll go on record as against using the idea. Nothing personal, but this is why Gesh also never really planned on having cities led by players ... only by admin-types, a little bit you sorta forgot to mention. Gesh wanted conflict between cities, yes, but he also knew that conflict had to be primarily managed by having DMs/Admins overseeing it as the leaders of those cities. Now if Bri still wants to use the idea or whatever, fine, his call, but I can see it as problematic. In fairness I think there should be a system for perhaps 3-4 player-run settlements.

Could one city eventually overthrow another? Sure, it's possible, depending on what the administrative team wants to do or how they wish to accomplish it via a story/plot. I suppose it's eventually possible at some point there is some battle between Kravenwood and Eleriina, for example ... but this stuff happens in conjunction with DM involvement, not just because some players decided to "march and take over." This is, however, presuming we are dealing with two administrative-run cities. If we are dealing with two hypothetical player-run cities, then I suppose it could happen as well, one could overrun the other within certain DM-monitored events. but it's not going to happen between an admin-run city and a player-run city. Basically put ... the admin-run cities don't fall into other hands without the involvement and overview of the DMs, and even then it's a very temporary thing._________________Envision something suitably witty here.

Gesh also never really planned on having cities led by players ... only by admin-types

well gesh was the one who promised me the city, and the one who asked bri to work on it because as he said to me he felt i had waited long enough and deserved it.

dont worry conrad i still love you_________________[quote:a89551bc29="AliZee'"]that shits utterly devoid of any meaningless sense...i tottally disagree on tha basis that tha argument you have pressented is full of actual facts and shit, i think based on tha fact that i have no idea of what tha fuck you were talkin gabout i would have to wholoeheartedly proclaim that you are wrong.
Thank you,
AliZee'[/quote]

"in the event of ireconcilable differences...give some GOLD to Ali and call it even"

haha nah i like tha rules..and i think its high time someone in power drew um up, and i think they should add this as book..."Conrads Rules of Engagement" or sumthin...that you would recieve along with tha eula when you first start out in dyso._________________
[quote:076179584b="Ogt"]farts leave the athmosfere because they have their OWN WILL, they are TIRED of being farts, and decieded that they would make their OWN PLANETS!!!!!!!!!![/quote]
GOLD!!!

Good stuff, hope Im not outta line offering a suggestion, but could you add to the top in big glowing letters something along the lines of "Thou shalt not break the rules OR THE SPIRIT OF THE RULES". Thats in there anyway I think, but it may help you to state that upfront and give yourselves a good bit of leeway in interpretation of C.R.O.E., hopefully avoiding any "its not strictly against the rules" arguments from obvious griefers. Make it more statutory interpretation than a contractual one.

Bah, law school was boring.

Az. (clearly not a lawyer)._________________Thieves respect property; they merely wish the property to
become their property that they may more perfectly respect it.
-- G.K. Chesterton, "The Man Who Was Thursday"

Wow, now this is beautiful
Some really good rules which leave room for little misinterpretation. I say that if someone is coming up with an argument "Well, it never said literally that I couldn't do that." You should not listen to that argument, because the player quite clearly knew that it wasn't tolerable. Most of these rules are pretty self-ecplanatory and I think that the really good RPers who have been around for quite some have followed these rules.

I would want to suggest to put these rules in a similar thing as the EULA, ad to notify people that these rules are also in effect and where you can read them. I wouldn't put them in the conversation though, because it can be bad enough to get the EULA itself with bad lag. _________________

The entire basis of CROE is that it's really a whole lot of common sense and simply trying to be a decent neighbor (in a manner of speaking) to your fellow player ... well, within some parameters. Insofar as whether or not it needs to be in glowing letters about the letter of the law vs. the spirit of the law ... I don't think it does. That's basically the beauty of the new arrangement in dealing with griefers and malcontents (no offense intended, Falk) ... they can't plead "well it wasn't exactly against the EULA" or "nothing I read specifically forbids this."

The EULA in conjuction with the support of CROE covers essentially everything and can be applied to virtually anything. It's a guideline designed to give a good framework for better roleplay while still leaving some room for those folks who just like to kill monsters and mind their own business. Those trying to snake around with some way to "get the upper hand" will find that the folks with common sense and a sense of a better roleplaying server will point to this guideline and expect better or expect repercussions ... the the enforcement arm of these guidelines, namely the mods/DMs/admins, will be trying to make sure people stick with it._________________Envision something suitably witty here.

Obviously killing someone for pickpocketing when they made no spot check is wrong but i would like to ask some questions on what applies in the following situations, and if they are not already in the CROE then i would suggest adding them so again the culprit cant say "I didn't know i couldn't do that"

Pickpocket Abuse: (i did not get to read the whole thing, just read one section of pickpocketing and didnt see it in there, so if its already in the CROE then forgive me )

This happened to me in 2.xa, i wont name names...Player A is standing in Kravenwood minding his own business, Player B and Player C come and pickpocket him, no big deal he fails the spot check, Player B and C seeing that Player A has not reacted to their pickpocketing stand next to the person and just continually pickpocket him. Player A begins to move away and B and C keep following him, pickpocketing him the whole way, player A goes to the estates to rest, they follow him and continue to pp him while he rests....at what point would it be Ok for Player A to kill Player B and C? ((What i really did was after resting in the estates i came out, and killed them both and sent a Tell to "Player B" that even tho i had failed the spot checks and i played along with it, but they continued to be lame so i killed them after it was clear they werent willing to stop. Was this the right to do? and under the CROE would i have been able to save so much more berries from being stolen?

Also if someone's Armor is pickpocketed from them, say a Heavy Plate. Is it RP to notice that it was taken or does the spot check count for such abundunt items as well, I ask this because Malakalam had a problem with that before.

again if they are already in the CROE im sory_________________[quote:a89551bc29="AliZee'"]that shits utterly devoid of any meaningless sense...i tottally disagree on tha basis that tha argument you have pressented is full of actual facts and shit, i think based on tha fact that i have no idea of what tha fuck you were talkin gabout i would have to wholoeheartedly proclaim that you are wrong.
Thank you,
AliZee'[/quote]

This is actually covered, even if not as explicitly spelled out as you put it. It does say in there that skills and feats can be abused and those who abuse them will be held in as much contempt as those who react in a totally irrational manner.

In the picture you paint of a bunch PPing like that over and over on a hapless target ... it comes to pass that eventually enough is enough and if they're looting that much inventory, I don't care how bad your spot is ... you're going to feel lighter and notice it. At that point I don't think there's gonna be a mod or DM (I know it wouldn't be me) who'd get on the PP victim for smashing down the thieves even if the victim hadn't actually spotted per the normal checks. It's the believability and realism issues in this case that trump the rules in my book.

There is, of course, the benign neglect issue, too. Perhaps the PP target is a known griefer or some other massive pain in the ass. I am not against allowing players to exact a little revenge within the construction of the game and thus I don't have to get involved in giving out punishment myself. In a case like this, should the griefer claim foul ... my reply is gonna be something like "well try not to be such a jerk to people and maybe people will leave you alone." This would be more of a one-time thing, however ... if the thieves kept targetting the same guy, then they're as much in the wrong as their target may be._________________Envision something suitably witty here.

Well, feeling lighter cant really mean that the closest/only person standing next to u is a thief. There is always the possablity of someone invis PPing you, or do they un-invis for that? I myself dont use PP. I have my own way of finding invis. people _________________Courage is not the absence of fear, but the presence of fear yet the will to go on.

We had some guidelines on thievery sometime ago. The basic guideline a rogue can follow is simplified: anything expendable (potions, scrolls, ammo, wands, etc) are free game. Anything non expendable (armor, swords, staffs with permanent effects, rings, bracers, boots etc etc...) stick to one object. These objects are generally speaking lighter and larger. Once you have something of worth don't push your luck.
Fairly simple rule but it's always worked for the League as a guideline.
I would be more leanient in that rule during guildwars. Having rogues undermine the operations of your opponent by hiring them to rob your foe before attacking their base of operation sounds like reasonable strategy within roleplay boundaries. Best check with one of the moderators/DM's before settting off though to make sure they know about it. To avoid misunderstandings so to speak.

And that sort of limitation, Falk, is exactly in line/in the spirit of the guidelines (and I was thinking of them when I wrote it). It goes along with the rampant PPing and "feeling lighter" bit. Bioware issues or not, it's purely a matter of fairness and not taking too much advantage of a good thing in the name of keeping the proverbial peace.

The expendable stuff is generally cheap and easily replaced, not as big a deal ... but after you've PPed someone's alternate weapon or alternate armor or whatever ... then you're dealing with bigger things and if you're just taking more and more ... you know someone's going to get really annoyed. Yes it may have been done totally "within the rules" but the rules don't account for pretty much taking ruthless advantage of a situation ... and face it, if someone's getting PPed every 2 steps they make (especially by a group of rogues) they're going to notice it ... I don't care how bad their spot is.

Using some self restraint as the rogue shows that not only does the player of the rogue have a sense of fairness and such in the game but also goes a long way in avoiding dealing with someone who may react in a purely irrational manner. We'll always have some who are prone to "powergaming" stuff ... but might otherwise keep quiet and mind their business. There's no sense in baiting them into a situation where they go ballistic._________________Envision something suitably witty here.

I like how you guys are really trying to define this pp thing. It all sounds good. I mean really how could some one steal a whole set of armour. What if the person is resting though? I guess you really can't sleep with all your gear on. So wouldn't that leave an oppertunity for some rouge to slip in and take advantage of this prime moment to light'n a happless victims load? I guess this all is going to boil down to good RP'ing and common sense.
I also like the fact that not all illlegal activity can be carried out in the comfort of a city. Red would come up with some great scams and I used laugh at how foolish people were to fall for'em. *chuckles now just thinking about it.* I did find it hard to understand how he could carry them out in non PvP area's though. There was no real local guard that could investigate and bust up the operation. Now this affords some do gooding group the oppertunity to get involved and take up a cause to remove this bilght on society.

I will say sense Conrads new rules i havent had abunch of ppl coming up to me saying this person has been rez Pking and wanting me to go kill them. That bugged me almost as much as some noob begging for gold for they can get +1 full plate.___________________________
I might be drunk but you will still be ugly in the morning!

Will these rules be placed in game... on a board perhaps
?
Or in the Eula thing.... I mean... I don't play anymore but if someone does play and doesn't know these rules cause he/she doesn't visit the forums, then thats kinda
Ah well.... to long for me to read this all!

Well I am not going to get into a big discourse here but there's a few people who've been up to some not-so-good stuff ... and I don't mean trying to RP evil or whatever. What I am talking about is griefing, taking out their personal issues on players in game, arranging higher levels killing lowbies, making various personal threats against other players as well as the server and, if that wasn't enough, not following the basic bits of sense in the Rules of Engagement.

Some will be going away for an indefinite period, some for a month or so. Don't bother asking me about it as I am not going to discuss it with anyone. The reasons have been explained in the previous paragraph and I have enough commentary from various moderators, players and other DMs to put teeth to it. I dragged my feet insofar as trying to be "fair" but some old dogs never do learn new tricks and now I either put up or shut up when it comes to a few people. I hope others will get the picture and reconsider their behavior quickly. Now that this has been done, I will be less inclined to be as diplomatic with similar actions from the friends and associates of the guilty._________________Envision something suitably witty here.

Will these rules be placed in game... on a board perhaps
?
Or in the Eula thing.... I mean... I don't play anymore but if someone does play and doesn't know these rules cause he/she doesn't visit the forums, then thats kinda
Ah well.... to long for me to read this all!

i think u do play but just on a char no one knows about_________________[quote:a89551bc29="AliZee'"]that shits utterly devoid of any meaningless sense...i tottally disagree on tha basis that tha argument you have pressented is full of actual facts and shit, i think based on tha fact that i have no idea of what tha fuck you were talkin gabout i would have to wholoeheartedly proclaim that you are wrong.
Thank you,
AliZee'[/quote]

It's been discussed in other threads, and I think there should be some official rule on multiclassing.

A lot of people choose multiclass combos that are just too powergamy to understand the RP concept of - the biggest example being the sorcerer/paladin combo. This combo should be banned outright - there's no valid RP excuse for it, it's too obscure. Though there aren't many players doing this now, so it's not much of a problem.

Another thing that really gets on my nerves is players who 19/1 level (or thereabouts). "I trained initially as X, but then after my first season I changed my mind to Y" is not a valid RP excuse for powerplay. I notice that some players are trying to make up a big BS story of how they have 1 or 2 levels of a certain class in a desperate attempt to cover up their powergaming. It's not cool, it's totally lame, and you won't grow a bigger penis for doing it, so don't bother trying. If you truly wish to multiclass, then take at least 5 levels of that class.

Perhaps the above is too much for players - it doesn't fit in with their powergaming ideas. But the next thing should definately be monitored. One of the reasons why players 19/1 level is to save up skill points, then when they get to level 20 they take 1 level of the other and spend all the skill points on that class. This is not allowed by the rules, and should not be allowed in dyso. I even once had a 19/1 wiz/rogue that saved up skill points, but not when I realised it wasn't allowed. the maximum number of skill ranks you are allowed in your class is the class level +3. No one should take anymore than that.

Good RP multiclasses to me are druid/rangers and also paladin/clerics. Fighters and Rogues generally make good multiclasses with most others in terms of RP, but as I said, show you're serious about that class by taking at least 5 levels.

Anyway that's what I suggest. I hope some multiclassing rule is passed to stop power/metagaming, it gets really annoying when I see 19/1, 18/1/1 or 17/2/1 characters on the server, obviously with the only intention of powergaming.

As y'all might know I am totally against this lametardian multiclass strategy, so I back this suggestions fully. I get just as frustrated as Griff when I see some craptardish powerlamer with levels along the lines 19/1 or 18/1/1 etc. Not much to add really, Griff explained it quite well.

Also the skillstacking or whatever you call it, SHOULD be forbidden. No point in discussing. It's a bug, and should be prohibited to exploit just like all the other exploits we already banned.

I have to admit that I tend to think that if you're not gonna take at least 3 levels in a class, you shouldn't take it in the first place. That said ... I'd have to think about repercussions and all that for doing so._________________Envision something suitably witty here.

Ok, I'll make this quick as it's not meant to be a full out response, but rather my two cents.

I will start by saying this is the first rpg that I have played, so I don't have a wealth of experience on the topic, but a lot of the best ideas/views come from those that don't have said experience.

Ok, from what I understand a role-playing game is one in which you assume that you ARE your character....to that end I don't understand the not allowing 1 or 2 levels of another class. My reason for saying that is this....one of my characters is a Cleric. Ok, so I have taken 1 level of fighter. OMG, I must be a powergamer. I see it quite the opposite when assuming the role of my character. My character has studied one season of the fighting arts for 2 reasons: 1) He wants to gain a little more knowledge about fighting, as he doesn't feel he knows as much as he would like to know, and 2) he wants to better understand those fighters he may come up against while representing is diety's beliefs in the land of Dyso.

Now, tell me why that is not a valid rp reason for one level of fighter? Now maybe there is some hardcore D&D rule that states that is not a valid rp reason, but I say "who cares". This is not D&D.......it is based loosely on it (from what I can see and what friends of mine who have D&D experience say) and that is it.

I totally understand this is not my module and I of course will not flame administration for any changes they make. As Conrad has mentioned before, as a player I can just leave, as that is my right, just like making the module whatever they want is their right. Completely understood. I just don't think this whole you must take x many levels in a second class if you multiclass is as well thought out as some people may think.

Sure there are people that do the 19 fighter/1 rogue to get the use magic ability, etc., but there will ALWAYS be those who will exploit things in game.....pass this multi-classing restriction and someone will find something else to exploit that people won't be happy about. Where do you draw the line and just let people play the game?_________________Izboliek Vulame -- Knight, Order of the Shining BladeGirek Vulame -- Counsellor, Crimson HandUrg Bustum -- Crimson Guard, Crimson Hand